Conroy's internet censorship agenda slammed by tech giants

Asher Moses

Australia's biggest technology companies, communications academics and many lobby groups have delivered a withering critique of the government's plans to censor the internet.

The government today published most of the 174 submissions it received relating to improving the transparency and accountability measures of its internet filtering policy.

Legislation to force ISPs to implement the policy is expected to be introduced within weeks. The filters will block a blacklist of "refused classification" websites for all Australians on a mandatory basis.

Most of the submissions called for full transparency surrounding the operation of the list and for all sites placed on the list by bureaucrats at the Australian Communications and Media Authority first to be examined by the Classification Board.

Advertisement

They supported a regular review of the list by an independent expert and the ability for blacklisted sites to appeal.

But many reiterated their concerns that the policy is fundamentally unsound and would do little to make the internet a safer place for children. Many said the scope of blocked content was too broad and would render legitimate sites inaccessible, while the process of adding sites to the blacklist could be subject to abuse by bureaucrats and politicians.

Google, which today officially stopped censoring search results in China, said it had held discussions with users and parents around Australia and "the strong view from parents was that the government's proposal goes too far and would take away their freedom of choice around what information they and their children can access".

Google also said implementing mandatory filtering across Australia's millions of internet users could "negatively impact user access speeds", while filtering material from high-volume sites such as Wikipedia, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter "appears not to be technologically possible as it would have such a serious impact on internet access".

"We have a number of other concerns, including that filtering may give a false sense of security to parents, it could damage Australia's international reputation and it can be easily circumvented," Google wrote.

The search giant said it was preferable instead to focus on improving education around cyber safety and providing tools that people could install on their home computers to block unwanted content.

Many of Google's concerns are mirrored by many of the other submissions by academics, technology companies, industry groups, lobby groups and ISPs.

Microsoft demanded protection against "arbitrary executive decision making" surrounding content added to the list and noted the potential for banned material to be loaded on to a site without the sanction of the owner of that site.

Yahoo and Google's submissions, along with many others, expressed concerns that the scope of content to be filtered was too broad.

"Yahoo are entirely supportive of any effort to make the internet a safer place for children, however mandatory filtering of all RC material could block content with a strong social, political and/or educational value," Yahoo's submission read.

It listed some examples of innocuous sites that could be blocked including:

- Safe injecting and other harm minimisation websites.

- Euthanasia discussion forums.

- A video on creating graffiti art.

- Anti-abortion websites.

- Gay and lesbian forums that discuss sexual experiences.

- Explorations of the geo-political causes of terrorism where specific terrorist organisations and propaganda are cited as reference material.

Yahoo also pointed to a recent paper that provided "several examples where knee jerk regulatory reactions to 'controversial' content have been entirely out of step with broader public opinion".

The Australian Federation of AIDS Organisations fears sites that are valuable to sexual health promotion might be placed on the blacklist.

"Social research has shown that information, 'chat' and even pornographic sites play an important role in providing information about sexuality and sexual health, particularly for men who have sex with men and same-sex attracted young people," it wrote.

Mark McLelland, an associate professor in the sociology program at the University of Wollongong, said the filters could block access to an entire genre of niche but popular Japanese animated fiction.

Even the Australian Christian Lobby, one of the biggest supporters of the internet filtering plan, said inadvertently adding innocuous content to the blacklist would "undermine the entire policy".

Telstra fears the blacklist of banned sites could be leaked - as has already occurred last year - and "could be used as a directory of harmful content, which would therefore become more easily available to users that are able to circumvent the ISP filter or who are located overseas".

Colin Jacobs, spokesman for online users' lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia, said it was clear from the submissions that the vast majority have a difficult time stomaching the filter at all.

"Many of the submissions stated flat out that the filter was not needed," he said.

"Most of the rest held their noses and tried to come up with a way this inherently secret process could be made more transparent."

64 comments so far

My plea to the government is listen. This silly policy will cost many votes and for what reason?
There is time to back off and I would have thought that the submissions would given an easy out "You could respond to the populations views"

Commenter

Clive

Location

Tamworth

Date and time

March 23, 2010, 2:49PM

It's good to see so many organisations have finally started to publically speak against Conroy's great Aussie Internet filter.

It's already been shown that the filter will not prevent pedophiles from communicating or posting their sick material. They don't use sites in such a way that the filter will block. So why does Conroy continue with his fiction that it will protect the children?

Then you have the special interest lobby groups who are pushing for the filter. Funnily enough, the Australian Christian Lobby is one of the major "stakeholders", as they refer to themselves. This is the same group that paid a reseach group (as did Michael Atkinson - using tax payer money), to claim that the link between violent video games and violence was more evident that the link between smoking and lung cancer. It's great to see "research companies" making wild claims without indicating they're being paid to do so.

There is also the problem of what countries push internet filtering on their citizens. China, Iran, North Korea and Burma are all countries with terrible human rights abuses, with totalitarian governments and impose internet filters to stop freedom of speech and jail dissidents.

There is also the matter of Conroy giving Channels 7, 9 & 10 a $250 million tax break.. $250,000,000! Has anyone noticed a lack of coverage by these 3 tv stations to comment on Conroy's filter? It's amazing what $250 million can buy a government who wishes to muzzel the free press.

The sooner Conroy and his filter go, the better.

Commenter

Rob

Location

Sydney

Date and time

March 23, 2010, 2:52PM

Keep it up Google! We need you and America to help fight this government. The Australian media doesn't seem to care.

Commenter

Nick

Location

Sydney

Date and time

March 23, 2010, 2:52PM

No, no, no, no, no, no, no.

You are all child molesters for opposing this. Senator Conroy and his supporters said so. Ban it all. Ban this sick filth now!!!1!!!

Commenter

E_Y

Location

Australia

Date and time

March 23, 2010, 2:52PM

This is an extreme totalitarian measure that I would expect to see in a decrepit state lacking a democratic structure. However, this is happening in Australia. It's embarrassing that our country gets compared with the likes of China on the same issue of censorship.

How can we not view this as an infringement of rights? We need to change our constitution and include something that guarantees our freedom of speech and access to information.

Disgusting!

Commenter

Jonas

Location

Sydney

Date and time

March 23, 2010, 2:53PM

Wow, some sense is being published at last.

Now, the big question is whether or not Conroy has enough smarts to understand the information being presented to him.

PS. If the legislation does get up, I'm going to be first in line to get all websites contain references to or from the Bible to be banned - all that incest, rape, murder, incitement to hatred must certainly make them suitable for the RC block ;)

Commenter

rob1966

Location

Sydney

Date and time

March 23, 2010, 2:56PM

I won't be voting for the government or coalition due to their support of this legislation. I realise this is probably futile in terms of getting the legislation defeated however I think it is important that we stand up for our rights. For the first time in my life I am prepared to participate in political action to defeat a policy which I think strikes at the absolute heart of democracy.

Commenter

berihebi

Date and time

March 23, 2010, 2:57PM

This is what is needed...the big boys of the industry coming out letting the public know that 'porn' is not the only thing affected by this filter.

Up until this point if you asked any random person on the street about the filter they would tell you its a good idea because it will stop kids looking at porn. This shows how poorly the media has conveyed the real scope of the filter.

All internet users will agree that children should not have access to porn sites and malicious content. But legal consenting adults should have the right to access any LEGAL content they wish.

Parents already have access to software that monitors and blocks internet traffic. It is the parents job to make sure their children aren't accessing bad content.

If this filter is activated I will be packing my family up and looking for a new country to call home. A country that doesn't infringe the rights of its citizens to have access to the information and content it should have.

Commenter

Cody

Date and time

March 23, 2010, 2:58PM

@Rudd (and puppet Conroy):

When the whole world's against you... what's the common denominator?

Commenter

Well-Educated

Location

Melbourne VIC

Date and time

March 23, 2010, 3:03PM

What a surprise - "People who know something about the way the internet works oppose the filter."

Next you'll be telling me that the sun's going to rise in the east tomorrow. Say it ain't so!